Sorry I haven't been one for a while, but I thought I'd do an informative article on how to use your ISP's freezone (the downloads that don't count towards your limit) as part of your repositories in Ubuntu.
Why? I have limits per month on my downloads and if I exceed those (which I always do), my internet gets shaped. But, my ISP has a "freezone" - an area where I can download from their servers and it doesn't count. They also happen to host some reasonably (but not perfectly) up to date Ubuntu repositories. So I figured out how to add them on, remark all the usual ubuntu ones and not waste my downloads.
In my instance, the ubuntu repositories are at http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu/dists/. I found them quite by accident trowling around the server on the ISP's site. The directory list is as follows:
files
Index of /linux/ubuntu/dists/
Name
Last modified
Size
File Description
Parent Directory
-
dapper
Tue Aug 8 20:41:18 2006
-
dapper-backports
Tue Aug 8 20:41:26 2006
-
dapper-proposed
Tue Aug 8 20:41:26 2006
-
dapper-security
Tue Aug 8 20:41:26 2006
-
dapper-updates
Tue Aug 8 20:41:23 2006
-
edgy
Wed Oct 25 23:52:55 2006
-
edgy-backports
Tue Aug 8 20:41:17 2006
-
edgy-proposed
Tue Aug 8 20:41:17 2006
-
edgy-security
Tue Aug 8 20:41:17 2006
-
edgy-updates
Tue Aug 8 20:41:17 2006
-
feisty
Mon Nov 27 20:35:24 2006
-
feisty-backports
Wed Nov 1 21:24:13 2006
-
feisty-proposed
Wed Nov 1 21:24:13 2006
-
feisty-security
Wed Nov 1 21:24:13 2006
-
feisty-updates
Wed Nov 1 21:24:13 2006
-
gutsy
Sun Oct 7 12:17:40 2007
-
gutsy-backports
Fri Apr 20 21:25:58 2007
-
gutsy-proposed
Fri Apr 20 21:25:59 2007
-
gutsy-security
Fri Apr 20 21:25:59 2007
-
gutsy-updates
Fri Apr 20 21:25:59 2007
-
hardy
Fri Oct 19 01:46:36 2007
-
hardy-backports
Fri Oct 19 01:46:36 2007
-
hardy-proposed
Fri Oct 19 01:46:36 2007
-
hardy-security
Fri Oct 19 01:46:36 2007
-
hardy-updates
Fri Oct 19 01:46:36 2007
Great!
So I edit my /etc/apt/sources.list using gedit or nano or whatever you like:
sudo gedit /etc/apt/sources.list
In the file I remark (put a #) in front of the regular ubuntu entries (eg. #deb http://au.archive.ubuntu.com gusty main )
I add an entry for each of the above lines for my distro, i.e. add the following lines:
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gutsy main
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gutsy restricted
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gutsy universe
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gutsy multiverse
The main, restricted, universe and multiverse entries are all sub folders in http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu/dists/gutsy/ - I think that the server folder structure has to be that particular way. The dists bit gets dissed.
Then I add for each other folder in the dists directory:
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gusty-updates main
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gusty-updates restricted
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gusty-updates universe
deb http://ftp.iinet.net.au/linux/ubuntu gusty-updates multiverse
and so on for gutsy-security, gusty-backports, whatever you want.
Pretty simple really.
Save and exit the /etc/apt/sources.list, and update via command line or update manager (refresh the list first) and it should all be up and running.
My ISP can be a few days behind, but not enough to make me not consider this a worthwhile thing to do.
Cheers,
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Gutsy - Not Happy Jan
I was looking forward to Gutsy, I mean, really looking forward to it. Compiz by default, bulletproof X, easy upgrade and the media hype, oh my goodness, almost as big as Vista.
So I jumped on to Update Manager, excited by this upgrade. Upgrade went fine - I know this, because when I used the live CD later, it did exactly the same thing.
I tried the final beta of gutsy. It worked fine, except for compiz. That was crap. I haven't bothered to get it okay on Feisty, I'm happy with the cube and wobbly windows, in fact they are productive. But no effects. I have an ATI 9550 with 256mb memory.
Gutsy final didn't work. It couldn't, wouldn't load GDM. Bulletproof my bumhole. Fine, I could hack it not working with compiz, but at least having a metacity working, but nothing? Tried Kubuntu, so it isn't Gnome, it is X.
That is unacceptable. I could go and search out to fix it, but I'm not. After such a big leap with Feisty, it isn't good enough. I hope this poor showing 1. Doesn't hurt the uptake of Ubuntu on desktops and 2. Augers well for Hardy Heron, in that it is an LTS release and they bought compiz on prior to hardy, in order to stablise it.
Update:
I did find a solution to at least get the live CD going. I don't know if it works, because I'm at work, but here is the link http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=584876.
My only other issue is whether I can run compiz fusion in any form on it. We will see and I will keep you posted. The guy who had the same issue was running a 9800, I'm running a 9550, so we will see how ATI responds, but it has been noted on Launchpad and Ubuntu are aware of it.
Still, lucky I'm not a new user trying it for the first time. Microsoft has given Linux a chance, with the steaming pile of faeces that is Vista. I'm hearing so many non-tech Windows users, who are very unhappy with Vista, but have no concept of anything else other than Windows and don't know about Linux, or even that Mac is different. I wouldn't want to recommend Ubuntu, only for *this* to happen.
So I jumped on to Update Manager, excited by this upgrade. Upgrade went fine - I know this, because when I used the live CD later, it did exactly the same thing.
I tried the final beta of gutsy. It worked fine, except for compiz. That was crap. I haven't bothered to get it okay on Feisty, I'm happy with the cube and wobbly windows, in fact they are productive. But no effects. I have an ATI 9550 with 256mb memory.
Gutsy final didn't work. It couldn't, wouldn't load GDM. Bulletproof my bumhole. Fine, I could hack it not working with compiz, but at least having a metacity working, but nothing? Tried Kubuntu, so it isn't Gnome, it is X.
That is unacceptable. I could go and search out to fix it, but I'm not. After such a big leap with Feisty, it isn't good enough. I hope this poor showing 1. Doesn't hurt the uptake of Ubuntu on desktops and 2. Augers well for Hardy Heron, in that it is an LTS release and they bought compiz on prior to hardy, in order to stablise it.
Update:
I did find a solution to at least get the live CD going. I don't know if it works, because I'm at work, but here is the link http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=584876.
My only other issue is whether I can run compiz fusion in any form on it. We will see and I will keep you posted. The guy who had the same issue was running a 9800, I'm running a 9550, so we will see how ATI responds, but it has been noted on Launchpad and Ubuntu are aware of it.
Still, lucky I'm not a new user trying it for the first time. Microsoft has given Linux a chance, with the steaming pile of faeces that is Vista. I'm hearing so many non-tech Windows users, who are very unhappy with Vista, but have no concept of anything else other than Windows and don't know about Linux, or even that Mac is different. I wouldn't want to recommend Ubuntu, only for *this* to happen.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Dunderhead's review of Puppy
Dunderhead's observation of Puppy Linux:
In my previous blog, I mentioned that I'd inherited around 6 computers from work with CRT monitors ranging from 15" to 19" and that these would become my little testing ground for smaller distributions. The average set of components seems to be around the 2ghz Celeron, with 40gb HDD and 256 or 512mb RAM. I have a server with a P3 board, and SCSI tape drive (I don't intend to use it, it might end up on ebay).
Also, previously, I pondered about the difference between Puppy and Xubuntu on basic computers and their relative use. I found that puppy would fly along on a 1.3ghz Celeron, whereas Xubuntu would slow a little once some packages were installed on the 2.0ghz Celeron.
I personally love Puppy. Yes, it has its little inconveniences and idiosyncrasies, but nothing I'm not prepared to live with, given its tiny footprint and super-fast operation.
So I thought "why not get a non-tech user to use puppy for a little while and review it", so I did. The observations below are from that non-tech user's point of view, and I have faithfully replicated her opinions, rather than change them into our language. Where translation into geek-speak or even normal English is needed, I have offered it, but other than that, it is pretty well a verbatim review. This review was given to me verbally, so again, replicating non-tech review as best I can.
A little about our guinea pig:
In my previous blog, I mentioned that I'd inherited around 6 computers from work with CRT monitors ranging from 15" to 19" and that these would become my little testing ground for smaller distributions. The average set of components seems to be around the 2ghz Celeron, with 40gb HDD and 256 or 512mb RAM. I have a server with a P3 board, and SCSI tape drive (I don't intend to use it, it might end up on ebay).
Also, previously, I pondered about the difference between Puppy and Xubuntu on basic computers and their relative use. I found that puppy would fly along on a 1.3ghz Celeron, whereas Xubuntu would slow a little once some packages were installed on the 2.0ghz Celeron.
I personally love Puppy. Yes, it has its little inconveniences and idiosyncrasies, but nothing I'm not prepared to live with, given its tiny footprint and super-fast operation.
So I thought "why not get a non-tech user to use puppy for a little while and review it", so I did. The observations below are from that non-tech user's point of view, and I have faithfully replicated her opinions, rather than change them into our language. Where translation into geek-speak or even normal English is needed, I have offered it, but other than that, it is pretty well a verbatim review. This review was given to me verbally, so again, replicating non-tech review as best I can.
A little about our guinea pig:
Pregnant mother of two, who suffers from what we both term "pregnancy ditz" on the odd occasion.
She still struggles with the concept of a spreadsheet, is afraid of burning a CD, is extremely impatient ("why does burning that damn CD take 5 minutes" and "that webpage took 30 seconds to load") and would have no idea about codecs.
Her computing tasks are as follows:
- Playing Solitaire and other card and puzzle games
- Browsing ebay
- Reading email
- Listening to music
- Watching stuff
- Googling anything
- Downloading torrents (this is the one task I have taught her to do)
I bought her a laptop about 1 year and 3 months ago, with Windows XP on it, and all the usual crapware, which I then periodically removed. She started off a little afraid to do anything, but by about 2 months, got so lax with it, that it was thorough infested with spyware, adware, malware et al, to the point where it was unusable. Totally unusable. She had got the the point, where she was hurling invectives at it frequently, and I had to stop her from physically throwing it out the window (I mentioned the impatience above. It is born from a very short Franco-Hungarian temper).
So I said to her "don't throw it, will you let me fix it?", to which she said "Whatever, just get the so-and-so to work!" I said to her "whatever I want?", to which she said "Yes, I want to play solitaire without taking 10 minutes to load, jump on ebay and listen to music".
It ended up an Ubuntu Machine (Dapper, only just upgraded to Feisty), which she is happy with, it does what she wants, requires no maintenance from me, and according to said Bad Tempered, Pregnant Franco-Hungarian monster "is heaps easier to use and I don't feel like I'm going to break it" (the OS, not the laptop).
Anyways, after all that, you get the picture. Our test subject is a Bad-tempered, impatient, non-tech, tech-afraid, pregnant, coconutty (blonde on the inside, brunette on the outside) crazy franco-hungarian monster.
If you are a puppy lover, stop here. Given test subject, you might not like what is said beyond this point. You have your laugh, just bugger off.
Crazy, Bad-tempered, Pregnant, franco-hungarian, monster, non-tech savvy, impatient coconut had this to say:
Icons - "they are cute" - this means that the icons are well designed. Maybe all those on Gnome-look/KDE-look could make a set of icons based on puppy.
Torrents - "I download them and can't open them up" - partially my fault. There is no default program attached to the .torrent extension. She doesn't like having to find the bittorrent client and open them up. She also dislikes the download manager, which doesn't allow you to open the file straight (like mozilla does).
Downloading - "I can't download where I want, it just keeps going to some documents place. I want to be able to put it on my desktop and open it up" - with Ubuntu that is pretty well what she does. She then periodically cleans it up. She doesn't know about (and wouldn't understand) the Linux file structure. But again, the download manager needs to allow the option to open up.
Web Browsing - "It's okay, at least I can look at Ebay and email" - Seamonkey does the right job, and allows tabbed browsing.
Bootup - "It is quick to boot up" - that means that it has passed the impatient.... person's test - on a 1.3ghz Celeron. Not bad at all.
"It's crap, I prefer my computer, I can't do stuff, it's all back to front" - I think this adds fuel to the argument, that people with basic needs don't switch because they aren't used to the new Desktop environment. My wife has only basic Windows use, so Ubuntu was ideal. It also backs up my previous post, that puppy's biggest downside is that there is no easy way to do things, there tends to be a long way around. This needs to be fixed.
Logoff/Turnoff - "You have to go to that start menu, hit logoff and then shutdown. What's with that, it isn't even the right button" - this translates roughly as "You don't click the off button and shutdown, like in Ubuntu" - she finds the puppy way, too long a way around again.
Which leads me to the biggest cracker..... (scroll down)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"It feels too much like windows, especially the 'old one'" - the start menu, shutdown/logoff method, the "long way around", all reminds her of Windows and scares her. She feels safe with Ubuntu, and stated last night, as she laid in bed after watching a downloaded version of a TV program on her laptop - "I would rather use my computer".
I may have created the first non-tech Ubuntu refugee.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Xubuntu vs Puppy
Kickin' it right off today will be a (non-exhaustive) comparison between puppy and Xubuntu. With the pup reaching V3, and all linux enthusiasts (and even some non enthusiasts) looking at the release of Ubuntu's 7.10 Gutsy Gibbon in a little over a week, I thought it timely to compare Puppy 3.0 with Xubuntu 7.04 Feisty Fawn.
Both are lightweight distributions, with the idea being that they can resurrect (or prolong the life of) older hardware platforms. But both are signficantly different in how they go about this, and this should be a consideration if you are resurrecting old hardware.
A little background. Basically, I'm in the process of inheriting a few older computers and big fat CRT monitors that were otherwise destined for the mini skip. I'm not sure what I will do with half a dozen older computers, but I do know that it may involve home firewall and downloading duties for one or two of them. If I can find someone un-conservative enough to try another OS, they may also inherit a computer. In the meantime they are being refurbished and having a virus (that virus being Windows XP) removed from them.
Puppy Computer - a Celeron 1.3Ghz, 256mb Ram and 13Gb HDD.
Xubuntu Computer - a Celeron 2.0Ghz, 256mb Ram and 40Gb HDD.
Xubuntu
Being a fairly seasoned Ubuntu user now (though probably a noob to a lot of true veterans), the process of acquiring Xubuntu and booting the CD is second nature. My first concern was that downloading it, it was 565mb, which hardly struck me as lightweight. Nonetheless, I ignored that and got on with it.
I fired up the CD, which has a comparable boottime to Ubuntu Feisty on a 3.0ghz Athlon 64 with 1Gb RAM and 400Gb HDD space. Good good!
I have to say that the interface is sweet. Brilliant for both Windows refugees and anyone used to Ubuntu. The 3 menus are replaced with one, but it isn't the same XFCE Desktop Environment I have used on other distributions. That out of the way, it looks great, and in fact I probably slightly prefer the blue swish to the brown one in Ubuntu.
I click the install button and the install process is identical to Ubuntu. Keyboard, country and city, login name, partition information and let it go. At this point, by comparison to Ubuntu on the larger system, it did install considerably slower. What took about 20 minutes (tops!) for Ubuntu on the larger system, took half an hour with Xubuntu on the slower system. It is all academic really, and a lot quicker than an XP install I did last week, but still.
After installation and reboot (I like the new Xubuntu screen whilst it is booting up - very swish), I logged in. First check was internet connection. That was running fine, no need for any adjustments.
So I jumped onto http://www.animesuki.com/ to check if one of my favourite animes had a new episode posted. After downloading the torrent, I tried to open it and that was my first issue. No bittorrent client. Now I know that most of you will go "just download the blinking thing", and I'd be one of them, not the least reason being that I prefer bittornado to the standard client. But given I was trying Xubuntu, I don't want to waste time and bandwidth having to d/l a bittorrent client just to test my system.
That got me to thinking that if they "downsized" the distro, how did they go about it? Was this exclusion of Bittorrent indicative of a mentality that to downsize a distro, it mean excluding certain programs. I'd hoped not, because that sort of defeated the purpose to me. I mean, part of getting a lighter distro isn't just the hardware specs, but also the footprint it leaves. After all, a low end processor usually has a great deal less hard drive space also.
So I jumped on to Add/Remove Programs, and just scrolled through the list. I was also going to install all the usual audio and video codecs, so I could copy a few MP3s on, but going through the list I saw all the stuff that was missing - Serpetine CD creator, Aisleriot Solitaire, Bittorrent, Totem/Mplayer, etc. Crazy! At least they put abiword and gnumeric spreadsheet in, and then after all that, still included OOo Word Proc. So I installed them all. And then left a torrent on overnight.
Next day, I found the computer sluggish and a little unresponsive. So I'm a little miffed to say the least.
Also, if you are going to have to download all this stuff that Ubuntu includes, isn't that just dumb? Part of Ubuntu's beauty is the fact that it has basically everything a basic user needs. You want another bittorrent client, fine, but there is one already included, so you can use it straight away. To exclude all this, takes away, in my opinion, a key selling point for the *buntu family - that being a good set of basic apps to have a system straight up and running.
After installing XP last week, finding drivers and more importantly for this argument, having to install office, internet etc, I treasure the time and frustration (finding CDs, installing them after, etc) saved by Ubuntu's installation process and the stuff already included. Lightening a distribution by leaving things out, is a false send of "light".
I don't want a flamewar with the X/K/Ubuntu people, or the whole KDE/Gnome/XFCE/whatever war. I respect all the Desktop environments and like them all and the people that develop, test and use them for their hard work. But if you are looking to resurrect older computers, I wouldn't recommend Xubuntu.
I would recommend Xubuntu for those who find that the other *buntus have enough that is surplus to requirements, and are happy to mould their own computer and customise the programs on it from go. And those who prefer blue to brown.
Puppy Linux.
I like Puppy, and I feel good that the guy who wrote it is an Aussie. It gives me hope that not all Australians are too inclined to just follow after Microsoft. I still can't get the vision of the idiots lining up at Harvey Norman when Vista was released at midnight. It gives me nightmares, and I wonder how such a small population with such a big block o' dirt manages to survive and thrive.
Puppy is great, though my first gripe is that 3.0 doesn't install to harddrive anywhere near as easy as v2.17. I know it has to do with it trying to do its best to co-exist with XP, Vista and other Linux distros, but I still want the "wipe the hard drive out and start again" option. And to have to manually configure grub (i've had to do it on two different systems), is a pain. V2.17 just installed and was no problem.
That gripe aside, I boot it up and the boot time on it, despite being a 1.3Ghz celeron is quicker than Xubuntu on 2.0ghz. I have a gut feeling that, but for configuring keyboard and monitor on the CD bootup, that CD boot up is even quicker because it just dumps it in RAM and goes. I love that it takes so little time.
The JWM included as standard ain't pretty, but for those who are migrating from Windows 98 or Mistake Edition (ME), it will be completely familiar. And jumping onto the puppy wiki, you can add any number of Windows Managers (XFCE as per Xubuntu, IceWM (the one I settled on) and others). That flexibility is a great deal of fun.
The two big advantages I see it having is that it weighs in at a tad under 100mb, which leaves more harddrive space for useful things, and that it does so and still includes at least one program (and often two or more) for each function. Want a bittorrent client? There are two, and very functional. Want to burn CD's, DVD's and the like - again a couple of programs. The seamonkey browser whilst not beautiful, runs like a hamster on steroids. Email, paint, draw is all included.
Just as importantly for me is the inclusion of abiword (I've now got it on my Windows XP computer at work) and Gnumeric (ditto). Both are brilliant little programs for word processing and spreadsheeting and cross compatible with work, not only with the availability of each program for Windows, but also compatibility with Word and Excel. I have now included them as standard on all Ubuntu installations I've done.
So puppy has everything a basic user would need, without any additional software required.
My gripes with it are (besides being not too pretty) is that a lot of things have to be done the long way, much the same as XP. If I download a torrent, and I can't click it and get it going, I have to either 1. Set up file associations or 2. Go into the program and open the file manually. To use my USB key, I have to mount it, it doesn't self mount on the desktop (a big advantage in my eyes), same with CDs.
To me that isn't great. I understand the fact that manually mounting USB/CD's has its reasons, stability and lack of memory overhead being big ones. But giving users programs and then not setting up file associations strikes me as dumb.
Fine, give the user choice about which BT client they want, but if I open a torrent, I want it to open in something. In ubuntu it opens in the default client, which isn't my preferred client. That suits me fine initially, I will change it to my preferred client when I could be bothered, but if I'm testing my internet connection properly, I'm happy to use the default client.
Other not so gripe, is that it doesn't have the level of repositories nor support of the *buntus.
I know I can get the pupget to access the .debs but again, I couldn't be bothered. I like clicking Add/Remove or synaptic and just installing stuff. On the flip side, downloading and installing individual dot pups is brilliant, and the *buntus can learn from it. If I find something I like, I want to still click and install. I know that is having my cake (synaptic) and eating it (dot pups), but if the two distros could work that out between them, that would be great.
The forums are distinctly average by comparison. I know that Ubuntu has more users/abusers/onlookers than puppy, but the forums are easy to read, search well and have the answer to just about everything. Puppy doesn't. I wouldn't say the users are any more or less friendly, but just without that base of users, the support is a bit patchy. But I'm sure that its more a matter of time and development.
Conclusion:
This isn't bagging any distro. The beauty and indeed the reason for Linux as a whole is the great degree of customisability and flexibility within the one operating system. What suits one, won't always suit another and that is cool. In fact that is what makes our OS of choice infinately better than Windows, because "The Man" isn't giving us one option and then holding a stick above our heads to enforce it.
Xubuntu:
Pros - Runs okay on slower systems, looks good, little learning curve from Ubuntu or Windows, highly customisable, great if you don't want all the crap that comes with Ubuntu, but you don't want to find another flavour of Linux, huge software repositories, huge community and support forums.
Cons - Not as good on older computers as I needed, doesn't include stuff that I think needs to be, what is the use of a "light" distro, made light by excluding essential programs, theme customisation not as simple as Ubuntu, too similar to Ubuntu for some.
Puppy:
Pros - Light, really light - runs fast on just about anything; includes all basic necessary programs, can be run from USB/CD/anything that boots; boots very quickly, takes up little hard drive space; Window Manager can be changed with ease.
Cons - V3 install to hard drive can be fiddly, too much GRUB alterations, file associations and auto mount not standard, limited additional software without further work, forums small and with an average search option.
Both are lightweight distributions, with the idea being that they can resurrect (or prolong the life of) older hardware platforms. But both are signficantly different in how they go about this, and this should be a consideration if you are resurrecting old hardware.
A little background. Basically, I'm in the process of inheriting a few older computers and big fat CRT monitors that were otherwise destined for the mini skip. I'm not sure what I will do with half a dozen older computers, but I do know that it may involve home firewall and downloading duties for one or two of them. If I can find someone un-conservative enough to try another OS, they may also inherit a computer. In the meantime they are being refurbished and having a virus (that virus being Windows XP) removed from them.
Puppy Computer - a Celeron 1.3Ghz, 256mb Ram and 13Gb HDD.
Xubuntu Computer - a Celeron 2.0Ghz, 256mb Ram and 40Gb HDD.
Xubuntu
Being a fairly seasoned Ubuntu user now (though probably a noob to a lot of true veterans), the process of acquiring Xubuntu and booting the CD is second nature. My first concern was that downloading it, it was 565mb, which hardly struck me as lightweight. Nonetheless, I ignored that and got on with it.
I fired up the CD, which has a comparable boottime to Ubuntu Feisty on a 3.0ghz Athlon 64 with 1Gb RAM and 400Gb HDD space. Good good!
I have to say that the interface is sweet. Brilliant for both Windows refugees and anyone used to Ubuntu. The 3 menus are replaced with one, but it isn't the same XFCE Desktop Environment I have used on other distributions. That out of the way, it looks great, and in fact I probably slightly prefer the blue swish to the brown one in Ubuntu.
I click the install button and the install process is identical to Ubuntu. Keyboard, country and city, login name, partition information and let it go. At this point, by comparison to Ubuntu on the larger system, it did install considerably slower. What took about 20 minutes (tops!) for Ubuntu on the larger system, took half an hour with Xubuntu on the slower system. It is all academic really, and a lot quicker than an XP install I did last week, but still.
After installation and reboot (I like the new Xubuntu screen whilst it is booting up - very swish), I logged in. First check was internet connection. That was running fine, no need for any adjustments.
So I jumped onto http://www.animesuki.com/ to check if one of my favourite animes had a new episode posted. After downloading the torrent, I tried to open it and that was my first issue. No bittorrent client. Now I know that most of you will go "just download the blinking thing", and I'd be one of them, not the least reason being that I prefer bittornado to the standard client. But given I was trying Xubuntu, I don't want to waste time and bandwidth having to d/l a bittorrent client just to test my system.
That got me to thinking that if they "downsized" the distro, how did they go about it? Was this exclusion of Bittorrent indicative of a mentality that to downsize a distro, it mean excluding certain programs. I'd hoped not, because that sort of defeated the purpose to me. I mean, part of getting a lighter distro isn't just the hardware specs, but also the footprint it leaves. After all, a low end processor usually has a great deal less hard drive space also.
So I jumped on to Add/Remove Programs, and just scrolled through the list. I was also going to install all the usual audio and video codecs, so I could copy a few MP3s on, but going through the list I saw all the stuff that was missing - Serpetine CD creator, Aisleriot Solitaire, Bittorrent, Totem/Mplayer, etc. Crazy! At least they put abiword and gnumeric spreadsheet in, and then after all that, still included OOo Word Proc. So I installed them all. And then left a torrent on overnight.
Next day, I found the computer sluggish and a little unresponsive. So I'm a little miffed to say the least.
Also, if you are going to have to download all this stuff that Ubuntu includes, isn't that just dumb? Part of Ubuntu's beauty is the fact that it has basically everything a basic user needs. You want another bittorrent client, fine, but there is one already included, so you can use it straight away. To exclude all this, takes away, in my opinion, a key selling point for the *buntu family - that being a good set of basic apps to have a system straight up and running.
After installing XP last week, finding drivers and more importantly for this argument, having to install office, internet etc, I treasure the time and frustration (finding CDs, installing them after, etc) saved by Ubuntu's installation process and the stuff already included. Lightening a distribution by leaving things out, is a false send of "light".
I don't want a flamewar with the X/K/Ubuntu people, or the whole KDE/Gnome/XFCE/whatever war. I respect all the Desktop environments and like them all and the people that develop, test and use them for their hard work. But if you are looking to resurrect older computers, I wouldn't recommend Xubuntu.
I would recommend Xubuntu for those who find that the other *buntus have enough that is surplus to requirements, and are happy to mould their own computer and customise the programs on it from go. And those who prefer blue to brown.
Puppy Linux.
I like Puppy, and I feel good that the guy who wrote it is an Aussie. It gives me hope that not all Australians are too inclined to just follow after Microsoft. I still can't get the vision of the idiots lining up at Harvey Norman when Vista was released at midnight. It gives me nightmares, and I wonder how such a small population with such a big block o' dirt manages to survive and thrive.
Puppy is great, though my first gripe is that 3.0 doesn't install to harddrive anywhere near as easy as v2.17. I know it has to do with it trying to do its best to co-exist with XP, Vista and other Linux distros, but I still want the "wipe the hard drive out and start again" option. And to have to manually configure grub (i've had to do it on two different systems), is a pain. V2.17 just installed and was no problem.
That gripe aside, I boot it up and the boot time on it, despite being a 1.3Ghz celeron is quicker than Xubuntu on 2.0ghz. I have a gut feeling that, but for configuring keyboard and monitor on the CD bootup, that CD boot up is even quicker because it just dumps it in RAM and goes. I love that it takes so little time.
The JWM included as standard ain't pretty, but for those who are migrating from Windows 98 or Mistake Edition (ME), it will be completely familiar. And jumping onto the puppy wiki, you can add any number of Windows Managers (XFCE as per Xubuntu, IceWM (the one I settled on) and others). That flexibility is a great deal of fun.
The two big advantages I see it having is that it weighs in at a tad under 100mb, which leaves more harddrive space for useful things, and that it does so and still includes at least one program (and often two or more) for each function. Want a bittorrent client? There are two, and very functional. Want to burn CD's, DVD's and the like - again a couple of programs. The seamonkey browser whilst not beautiful, runs like a hamster on steroids. Email, paint, draw is all included.
Just as importantly for me is the inclusion of abiword (I've now got it on my Windows XP computer at work) and Gnumeric (ditto). Both are brilliant little programs for word processing and spreadsheeting and cross compatible with work, not only with the availability of each program for Windows, but also compatibility with Word and Excel. I have now included them as standard on all Ubuntu installations I've done.
So puppy has everything a basic user would need, without any additional software required.
My gripes with it are (besides being not too pretty) is that a lot of things have to be done the long way, much the same as XP. If I download a torrent, and I can't click it and get it going, I have to either 1. Set up file associations or 2. Go into the program and open the file manually. To use my USB key, I have to mount it, it doesn't self mount on the desktop (a big advantage in my eyes), same with CDs.
To me that isn't great. I understand the fact that manually mounting USB/CD's has its reasons, stability and lack of memory overhead being big ones. But giving users programs and then not setting up file associations strikes me as dumb.
Fine, give the user choice about which BT client they want, but if I open a torrent, I want it to open in something. In ubuntu it opens in the default client, which isn't my preferred client. That suits me fine initially, I will change it to my preferred client when I could be bothered, but if I'm testing my internet connection properly, I'm happy to use the default client.
Other not so gripe, is that it doesn't have the level of repositories nor support of the *buntus.
I know I can get the pupget to access the .debs but again, I couldn't be bothered. I like clicking Add/Remove or synaptic and just installing stuff. On the flip side, downloading and installing individual dot pups is brilliant, and the *buntus can learn from it. If I find something I like, I want to still click and install. I know that is having my cake (synaptic) and eating it (dot pups), but if the two distros could work that out between them, that would be great.
The forums are distinctly average by comparison. I know that Ubuntu has more users/abusers/onlookers than puppy, but the forums are easy to read, search well and have the answer to just about everything. Puppy doesn't. I wouldn't say the users are any more or less friendly, but just without that base of users, the support is a bit patchy. But I'm sure that its more a matter of time and development.
Conclusion:
This isn't bagging any distro. The beauty and indeed the reason for Linux as a whole is the great degree of customisability and flexibility within the one operating system. What suits one, won't always suit another and that is cool. In fact that is what makes our OS of choice infinately better than Windows, because "The Man" isn't giving us one option and then holding a stick above our heads to enforce it.
Xubuntu:
Pros - Runs okay on slower systems, looks good, little learning curve from Ubuntu or Windows, highly customisable, great if you don't want all the crap that comes with Ubuntu, but you don't want to find another flavour of Linux, huge software repositories, huge community and support forums.
Cons - Not as good on older computers as I needed, doesn't include stuff that I think needs to be, what is the use of a "light" distro, made light by excluding essential programs, theme customisation not as simple as Ubuntu, too similar to Ubuntu for some.
Puppy:
Pros - Light, really light - runs fast on just about anything; includes all basic necessary programs, can be run from USB/CD/anything that boots; boots very quickly, takes up little hard drive space; Window Manager can be changed with ease.
Cons - V3 install to hard drive can be fiddly, too much GRUB alterations, file associations and auto mount not standard, limited additional software without further work, forums small and with an average search option.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)